bsurd; it forces us to pay for colonial produce
at a rate nearly double that for which it may be purchased from our
neighbours.

When Lord Hawkesbury consented to evacuate Malta, on condition that it
should be independent of France and Great Britain, he must have been
aware that such a condition would never be fulfilled. He cared little
for the order of St. John, and he should have put, by way of postscript,
at the bottom of his note, "We will keep Malta in spite of you."
I always told the First Consul that if he were in the situation of the
English he would act the same part; and it did not require much sagacity
to foretell that Malta would be the principal cause of the rupture of
peace. He was of my opinion; but at that moment he thought everything
depended on concluding the negotiations, and I entirely agreed with him.
It happened, as was foreseen, that Malta caused the renewal of war. The
English, on being called upon to surrender the island, eluded the demand,
shifted about, and at last ended by demanding that Malta should be placed
under the protection of the King of Naples,--that is to say, under the
protection of a power entirely at their command, and to which they might
dictate what they pleased. This was really too cool a piece of irony!

I will here notice the quarrel between the First Consul and the English
newspapers, and give a new proof of his views concerning the freedom of
the press. However, liberty of the press did once contribute to give him
infinite gratification, namely, when all the London journals mentioned
the transports of joy manifested in London on the arrival of General
Lauriston, the bearer of the ratification of the preliminaries of peace.

The First Consul was at all times the declared enemy of the liberty of
the press, and therefore he ruled the journals with a hand of iron.

--[An incident, illustrative of the great irritation which Bonaparte
felt at the plain speaking of the English press, also shows the
important character of Coleridge's writings in the 'Morning Post'.
In the course of a debate in the House of Commons Fox asserted that
the rupture of the trace of Amiens had its origin in certain essays
which had appeared in the Morning POST, and which were known to have
proceeded from the pen of Coleridge. But Fox added an ungenerous
and malicious hint that the writer was at Rome, within the reach of
Bonaparte. The information reached the ears for which it